Plane Makes Emergency Landing at J.F.K.

plane debrisRob Bennett for The New York Times Metal debris believed to be from an engine fell on the roof of Varsity Plumbing and Heating in College Point, Queens, on Wednesday morning, just before an American Airlines flight made an emergency landing.

Updated, 4:55 p.m. | A commercial jetliner suffered a loss of one of its two engines shortly after taking off from La Guardia Airport on Wednesday morning and was forced to make an emergency landing at Kennedy International Airport, officials said.

American Airlines Flight 309, an MD-80 bound for Chicago’s O’Hare International Airport, landed at Kennedy around 8:35 a.m. after losing a trail of metal parts, evidently from its No. 2 engine, the Federal Aviation Administration said. Some of the metal parts were reported to have fallen onto a rooftop of a commercial building in Queens.

There were 88 passengers and five crew members on board, said Andrea Huguely, a spokeswoman for the airline. No one was injured.

The flight departed La Guardia shortly after 8 a.m. As it climbed to its flying altitude, the crew reported hearing a loud noise, then told air-traffic controllers that its second engine had failed. A special crew of emergency responders rushed to the runway, bracing for the possibility of a crash landing or fire, as the plane landed safely at Runway 22 Right, according to Jim Peters, an F.A.A. official. The plane then taxied to the ramp.

Most of the engine parts, including a four-foot section, landed on the roof of a plumbing company’s building on 123rd Street, in College Point, Mr. Peters said. He said federal officials and officers from the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey had gone to the location.

“The F.A.A. sent guys over there to inspect it,” Mr. Peters said. “The Port Authority police sent a unit over there and are in the process of picking up the pieces and photographing them, and they will be brought over to La Guardia for inspection.”

A man who answered the phone at Varsity Plumbing and Heating, at 31-99 123rd Street, said he was there when debris landed on the roof.

“As far as I know, just something fell off the plane and landed on the roof,” said the man, who provided only his first name, Steve. “I don’t know what it was or how it happened.” He said that the business was in the regular flight path and that people there often heard the roar of planes overhead.

In addition, a police official said a piece of the plane’s engine landed on a car, and damaging it, in Queens.

Metal fragments that the engine threw off all came out the back end and not through its cowling, or engine cover. None hit the fuselage, officials said. Mr. Peters characterized the No. 2 engine failure as, “a contained engine failure, because all of the metal went out the rear of the engine; none of it went through the cowling.”

In similar emergencies, engine parts coming through the fuselage have killed passengers or caused crashes. Twin-engine airplanes must be able to complete a takeoff and return to land safely on a single engine.

From the perspective of a passenger sitting inside the cabin, the No. 2 engine is on the right rear side of the aircraft.

Officials said the National Transportation Safety Board in Washington had been notified of the emergency landing, but Mr. Peters said it was unclear whether the safety board would come to New York and formally begin an investigation.

Ms. Huguely said the passengers were bused back to La Guardia, “so that we could place them on other Chicago flights.”

The MD-80 commercial plane has a capacity for 136 or 140 passengers, depending on the configuration.

“There was a pilot, a co-pilot and three flight attendants,” said Ms. Huguely, of the airline, adding that she did not know their experience level.

She added, “Our crews are trained to handle situations such as these, and our pilots did a fantastic job in landing the aircraft safely.”

Comments are no longer being accepted.

Warren Howie Hughes March 11, 2009 · 12:40 pm

Undoubtedly, not as dramatic as landing in the Hudson River, but, nevertheless, the end results were every bit as satisfying and of tremendous relief to all involved, both to everyone on board, and to all of us in the general population!

John J. Tormey III, Esq. March 11, 2009 · 1:11 pm

Watch the FAA now say, “Safety was never compromised”.

On what birds are FAA and NTSB now going to blame THIS nonsense on instead of airline/FAA cronyism and uninspected and underinspected plane defects – flying OSTRICHES?

Another potential tragedy thwarted. Well done to the pilots!

Aviation is about the last slice of America run by engineers following rules of science rather than politicians or scam artists. It’s also about the last slice that works.

Tens of thousands of hours of work were behind the sucessful landing; mechanical design and testing, the career pilot’s preparation for emergencies they will probably never see and analysis of every accident to determine how it could be prevented. The result is that it is now safer to fly than to walk the same distance.

“The No. 2 engine on an aircraft is the one on the right side, from the perspective of a passenger sitting inside the cabin.” ??

The #2 is better described on the right side, from the perspective of a passenger -facing- -forward- inside the cabin.

Once again, professionalism, training, and a little bit of luck save the day. Air travel is incredibly safe. (That said, when does the FAA ever say “safety was not compromised”?) Aviation accidents can and do happen, but they are remote outliers, not the center of the bell curve.

Kudos to the crew for knowing what to do and when to do it, and kudos to ATC for getting them to JFK safely. When no one is hurt, that’s a good kind of emergency to have.

oh, and John Ruskin, the #2 engine is the second one from the left, from the perspective of the flight deck (or yes, a passenger facing forward in the cabin.) On a four-engined plane, #2 is the inboard engine on the left side. On a twin-engined aircraft, #2 is the one on the right.

Congratulations to the pilot and his crew for executing a safe emergency landing, and thank goodness everyone is safe.

NOW … how exactly does a plane take off and “lose a trail of metal parts” from its engine? Are there not maintenance and repair practices, inspections and safety checks?

“Several pieces of metal fragments from the broken engine — those that pierced the engine cowling that covers the engine — were found embedded in the fuselage. ”

Wow, that was close.

Katherine,
Who knows? Maybe there was debris on the runway that got sucked into the engine. That’s what happened to the Concorde and they never flew it again.

Not every problem can be uncovered/discovered by a maintenance check. When a part fails, it fails. I’ll admit that MD-80s are getting kind of old and AA flies way too many of these type of aircraft for short haul domestic flights. I actually don’t like getting on an MD-90, would much rather be on a 737.

My wife and I were on the plane… and the article is right. Was a horrible experience and ruined our vacaction but we are so happy to be at home. No flying for me!

John J. Tormey III, Esq. March 11, 2009 · 3:58 pm

If Double A had been gathering the same information that I have gathered on FAA over the last two years while fighting them, Double A’s quote would instead be, “No flying in the USA, ever, until Hank Krakowski and Lynne Osmus are fired from FAA employ”. There IS the possibility of a responsible regulatory agency governing aviation, some day in the future – but not with the current roster of Bozo’s still working there.

I’m the wife of DoubleA and wanted to shed some light on the ‘unknown experience level of the crew’ comment. When the primary pilot introduced himself this morning, he added that his co-pilot would be flying the plane today and that we would be in good hands. This indicated a certain level of inexperience to me. Not saying this had anything to do with what happened to the engine, but something worth mentioning since AA didn’t seem to want to provide that information.

Can’t believe I didn’t mention this earlier when I referenced the pilot experience. Regardless of their level of experience, they did an excellent job of landing the malfunctioning plane safely and preventing what could have been a significant disaster. If I wasn’t carrying my luggage, I would have given them a hug!

John J. Tormey III, Esq. March 11, 2009 · 4:39 pm

Wife of DoubleA, though I am not certain there is any connection to the co-pilot issue either, I would simply respectfully request that you please consider bringing that same raw information immediately not just to the attention of FAA and NTSB in their now-inevitable dog-and-pony investigation (neither of whom you should trust) – but also to the attention of other media outlets, NATCA, the USDOT Inspector General (I.G.), A.G., GAO, FBI, and both aviation/transportation committees in both chambers of Congress especially Congressmen Oberstar and Costello. Please let me know if you need contact information for any of them. Unfortunately, we are in an era wherein FAA refuses to regulate safety, and so therefore we must resort to other public-sector and other overseers to regulate the ersatz regulators.
John J. Tormey III, Esq.
jtormey@optonline.net

Double A’s Wife,
The captain on the flight is my husband. His experience level is 10 years Naval Aviator flying P3’s 200 feet over the ocean searching for Russian subs off the east coast and over 20 years flying for AA, which over 15 years of that has been in the 80.

He was just trying to be cordial and give some credit to the rest of his crew. I am sure he mentioned the flight attendants, too. Once the emergency started, he immediately took over the controls and you can thank him for saving your life. Too bad your luggage was so important that you could not give gratitude for being alive!!!

Captains Wife

Haven’t most people been on a plane when one of the engines blew? I’ve been on a NWA flight that did last year and my fiance had the same situation 2 months ago on AA.

Losing pieces of metal is a new twist.

Double A’s Wife,
The captain on the flight is my husband. His experience level is 10 years Naval Aviator flying P3’s 200 feet over the ocean searching for Russian subs off the east coast and over 20 years flying for AA, which over 15 years of that has been in the 80.

He was just trying to be cordial and give some credit to the rest of his crew. I am sure he mentioned the flight attendants, too. Once the emergency started, he immediately took over the controls and you can thank him and his co-pilot for saving your life. Too bad your luggage was so important that you could not give gratitude for being alive!!!

Captains Wife

I’m willing to bet that a pilot’s actions would never be able to cause metal fragments to be spit out of an engine so I’m not sure of your point DoubleA wife. What are you suggesting, that the copilot, in his inexperience, touched the “DESTROY ENGINE” button by mistake? Good lord.

I forgot to add that my husband’s is a retired military pilot with over 20 years flying “heavy metal” P-3, C-130, and at American he has flown 757, 767, MD 80. He just received his 20 year pin at American. So, please be aware that he has a great deal of experience and you were very lucky to be in his and the co-pilot’s hands. I am very proud of him and the crew.

I am glad everyone is safe. They are now finding out that pieces of the engine were lodged in the fuselage and it could have been catastrophic. Feel very fortunate to be home safely. Not only was my husband and his crew looking out for you but, apparently someone else was watching out for you.

The copilot was probably hired in the late 80’s and has more flight hours and experience than you think. You should do some research on the industry and what it takes to be a copilot at AA before making ignorant comments such as that.

to all the peeps saying air travel isn’t safe…notice that they said the #2 engine failed. that means there is another one than can handle the job right on the other side of the fuselage.

Definetly a positive ending, although twin engine planes are designed to take off and land with one engine, so it’s not like this out of the ordinary. But yeah, nice job.

The captain and first officer (not “pilot” and “co-pilot”) typically trade off flying duties at most airlines. Typically, one will fly the aircraft while the other one will handle radio calls, clearances, and the like.

While the captain is usually more senior (in terms of time at the company, not necessarily in flight hours or flight hours in that particular aircraft type) than the first officer, both are fully qualified to command the aircraft.

As airline captain Patrick Smith put it in his Salon column, “Both crew members are fully qualified to operate the aircraft in all regimes of flight, and will typically take turns at the controls. On a two-leg day, for instance, the captain will fly the first leg, and the first officer will take the second. Either way both pilots are plenty busy, but only one is physically at the controls. The captain always has command authority — and a somewhat bigger paycheck. Moving from first officer to captain is strictly a function of seniority.”